nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Pavee point in common sense shocker!

Boring username

End option to marry at 16 in the North, urges Pavee Point

THE head of Pavee Point has called on the Catholic church to ‘harmonise’ the age of marriage on the island of Ireland.

Martin Collins said it was a ‘ridiculous situation’ that young people of 16 and 17 can marry across the border, when the age of marriage in the Republic is 18.

Mr Collins, from the Travellers’ representative group Pavee Point, estimated that around 20 young Traveller couples under the age of 18 cross the border each year to marry. “That’s far too many – in fact, one couple is too many,” he said.

“These young people are only developing physically and emotionally and then they find themselves married – I think it is wrong and I believe most Travellers think it is wrong,” he said.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/end-option-to-marry-at-16-in-the-north-urges-pavee-point-30990741.html

A rare nugget of common sense from Mr. Collins, and one I would actually agree with. This culture of child brides is something that needs to be demolished, and I hope the government and church move swiftly to outlaw this barbaric practise.

Find more posts tagged with

shane o'curry

Quick Links

Comments

Little CuChulainn

mikehn wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1159680/Shocking-moment-two-Irish-travellers-brutally-assault-man.html
Kinda sad when it gets to this stage

Like rabid dogs.

somuj

The likes of those scumbags should be tied down and boiling water and sugar poured into theirs eyes and down their throats.

end of the road

Venus In Furs wrote: »

No you constantly constantly constantly go against the grain in order to hold only a left-wing view, and never ever ever deviate from it (even to the point of out and out denial) due to stubbornness presumably.

It is 100 per cent as bad as right-wingers never ever ever deviating from a right-wing view just because they can't be seen to hold a view that veers more to the centre or to the left of centre.

My views mostly default to the left too, but occasionally veer in the other direction - not because I'm some sort of fascist, but because sometimes there are simply realities that cannot be denied.

no i don't. i do not go against the grain. i have my opinions and experiences. if people don't like it, fine. but i do not go against the grain and thats it

Shurimgreat

The tagging of repeat offenders has to be brought in, but unfortunately people would complain about human rights being infringed. There is a relatively small group of people in this country responsible for most of the violent crime, burgularies and so on. More than 5 convictions and you get tagged.

cyclops999

Athlone in complete lockdown. Barney McGinley removal to Saint Mary's church.

end of the road

ressem wrote: »

Over the next couple of days, families will be advising their kids to stay the hell out of the town centre of Athlone, with a high Garda presence due to the McGinley removal and funeral, a man killed at a wedding.

Even at the funeral last month of the 5 month old baby in Ahascragh, the village ended up being taped off by guards.

Insurance coverage can be contested if the damage is predictable. Mayhem among members of these families?
You think that publicans should take that risk of their staff and customers becoming injured bystanders?

There's a recent demonstrated risk that people will be hurt or murdered at these events involving these particular families. So no, shutting up shop isn't irrational distrust.

absolutely, they should take the custom and be glad of it. the law brought in to stop minority groups from being discriminated against was brought in for a reason and infact it should be extended further.

end of the road

Shurimgreat wrote: »

The tagging of repeat offenders has to be brought in, but unfortunately people would complain about human rights being infringed. There is a relatively small group of people in this country responsible for most of the violent crime, burgularies and so on. More than 5 convictions and you get tagged.

tagging is all ready in for certain situations. apart from that, it would cost to much even though its a good idea. nobody will be complaining about human rights unless it does go against human rights charters and legislation

Shurimgreat

end of the road wrote: »

tagging is all ready in for certain situations. apart from that, it would cost to much even though its a good idea. nobody will be complaining about human rights unless it does go against human rights charters and legislation

I hear you about the legality. In other words if someone is convicted of a crime and released is it legal to monitor their movements. Its a grey area which criminals of course exploit. We have a good idea these guys are going to reoffend given past behaviour, but we can't really do anything about it. In other words you can't restrict a person's movements until they actually commit a crime, a catch 22 situation.

Venus In Furs

end of the road wrote: »

no i don't. i do not go against the grain. i have my opinions and experiences. if people don't like it, fine. but i do not go against the grain and thats it

But you deny realities and ridicule people for opinions that aren't coming from bigotry.

About 10 years ago the entire town of Youghal nearly shut down - this was due to genuine fear, not just to discriminate.
It is bigotry to hate all travellers just because of being travellers, but it is not bigotry to acknowledge serious problems in traveller society which are at a higher proportion than their equivalent in settled society.

To Elland Back

TravellerGirl wrote: »

To be honest I can't tell you where they do get it but I wish them luck with whatever they have.
But can I ask you the same question.

I didn't ask YOU where you earn a living, I asked about the bulk of travellers in general as it would appear a mystery to a lot of people where the funds come from.

So no examples then from your friends, family, neighbours etc. ?

I work in an office BTW

Froshtbit

Because it'll be settled people's fault somehow and if not that, it'll be because settled folk do it too. This somehow justifies it and the fact that statistics presented thus far in this thread have shown that people from the traveller community are over represented in crime will be completely ignored.

haveringchick

end of the road wrote: »

absolutely, they should take the custom and be glad of it. the law brought in to stop minority groups from being discriminated against was brought in for a reason and infact it should be extended further.

Whst sn utterly ridiculous post this is. To suggest that business owners should put themselves their properties their families and they're other customers at physical risk just so peoples ssensibilities aren't hurt
The shooting during yhe week was within yards of a primary school. Uou are saying that if a child or some other innocent passerby was injured or worse then the only important thing is that Travellers don't feel "hurt" and that their right yo act in this manner is protected quite literally at all costs.
You are utterly deluded.
There are numerous newspaper accounts of Traveller gatherings erupting into absolutelysavage violence. Are uou seriously suggesting that these accounts are made up or otherwise exaggerated?

somuj

All the travellers in my town get their money from crime. Drug dealing and thieving mostly.

Better say all the travellers I know. Although maybe their this minority group I hear so much about. The other majority group are prob law abiding citizens in the town and must never come outside cause nobody knows them.

end of the road

To Elland Back wrote: »

I didn't ask YOU where you earn a living, I asked about the bulk of travellers in general as it would appear a mystery to a lot of people where the funds come from.

So no examples then from your friends, family, neighbours etc. ?

I work in an office BTW

how would she, or should she, know where or how all travelers get anything? do you or i know how everyone else does ?

end of the road

haveringchick wrote: »

Whst sn utterly ridiculous post this is. To suggest that business owners should put themselves their properties their families and they're other customers at physical risk

the minute a publican opens the door they are at risk, as they sell a mind aultering substance. thats the name of the trade

SEPT 23 1989

end of the road wrote: »

how would she, or should she, know where or how all travelers get anything? do you or i know how everyone else does ?

People in her circle say twenty people

66ad

end of the road wrote: »

the minute a publican opens the door they are at risk, as they sell a mind aultering substance. thats the name of the trade

Doesn't the publican also have right to refuse admission?

Filmer Paradise

end of the road wrote: »

the minute a publican opens the door they are at risk, as they sell a mind aultering substance. thats the name of the trade

When we have a family funeral & when all our relatives show up, the whole town doesn't go into lockdown mode. Guards eveywhere & so forth.

Funny that.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

haveringchick

end of the road wrote: »

the minute a publican opens the door they are at risk, as they sell a mind aultering substance. thats the name of the trade

And when Travellers, on the occasion of a family gathering, look to gain admittance to a hostelry while many of them are armed with guns knives slash hooks hurleys golf clubs and so on, then that risk multiplies out of all control. And they are not armed with a view to self defence. They mean to settle some old grudge and indulge a cavemanish desire to inflict pain.
Incidents of this are numerous. 2 incidents this week alone. A Traveller man sent to prison for beating his wife to death before withholding her body from her grieving family for a fortnight and denying all knowledge of the savage circumstances of her death. Then wild shooting in a sleepy village yards from a primary school full of small children.
Really EOTR I'd like to hear you justify this behavior?

Annasopra

66ad wrote: »

Doesn't the publican also have right to refuse admission?

It depends

If the person is intoxicated then yes

If they are refusing a person because they are a traveller then no

end of the road

66ad wrote: »

Doesn't the publican also have right to refuse admission?

he does as long as the reasons aren't discriminatery, however we both know that it is probably rife with abuse in fairness.

end of the road

haveringchick wrote: »

And when Travellers, on the occasion of a family gathering, look to gain admittance to a hostelry while many of them are armed with guns knives slash hooks hurleys golf clubs and so on, then that risk multiplies out of all control.

its still a risk that is part of a trade which sells a mind aultering substance. can't hack it, go into another type of business

Filmer Paradise

end of the road wrote: »

its still a risk that is part of a trade which sells a mind aultering substance. can't hack it, go into another type of business

Pubs close down when there's a load of Travellers in town. Everybody knows this.

Is there any other group of people that can cause this to happen?

Answers on a postcard please.

Wibbs

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

It depends

If the person is intoxicated then yes

If they are refusing a person because they are a traveller then no

I'd love to see you run a pub for a year and then get back to us, but then again that would be the reality on the ground, as opposed to some nebulous naive ideal in your head that wouldn't survive much contact with actual reality. No doubt at the end of that imaginary year you'd still be looking for the usual culprits in your mind to blame, even though you'd have closed the pub once or twice. You'd pass the buck to your well trodden demons. As per usual for you. At this point you're getting a tad boring with your seeking of offence.

end of the road wrote: »

its still a risk that is part of a trade which sells a mind aultering substance. can't hack it, go into another type of business

They do "hack it", but there comes a point. Then again I'm engaging with an actual, 24 karat stereotypical "SJW" whose opinions will never change. Well, they might if you ventured beyond your intellectual(and I use the word under major advisement) ivory tower of "leftie" naive nonsense.

haveringchick

end of the road wrote: »

its still a risk that is part of a trade which sells a mind aultering substance. can't hack it, go into another type of business

And whst about the takeaways snd other small businesses that have to close up for the day? Elderly people afraid to go out? How did yhey bring this on themselves? An elderly woman who was do intimidated she gave a Traveller gang €43500 to fix her roof? How has she only herself to blame?
I get it EOTR.you don't do personal responsibility. I hope that when you or someone you love has their turn as a victim of the culture of violence that you are just as quick to dismiss it as you are here.

Wibbs

haveringchick wrote: »

you don't do personal responsibility.

Your hippies never do HrC. It's always somebody else's fault and somebody else's role to clean up, or oversee things(QV 3rd wave "feminism". women are always victims and men are always to blame). It's their go to fallback position. It comes from never quite growing up. They still feel that there's a "parent" out there that squares the circle, that explains the complex stuff, that most of all takes responsibility for the complex stuff and the "bad things". This type in the past would have looked to "god(s)", or the purveyors of same, to obviate the need to think and more, to obviate the need for personal responsibility. "It was gaaawd that did it". Now it's whatever "archy" they think is in control. God forbid they would think they have control. That would be far too much for their fragile and adolescent egos to handle and they'd have to grow beyond their subjective feels about reality and grow up. Not easy for the type.

Cookie_Monster

Hitchens wrote: »

Mods adding likes to offensive posts (#2) .......anything in the mods charter concerning that?

some mods must just have a sense of humour I guess...

Just because they are a mod DOES NOT mean the are an AH mod and are just like a normal poster outside of the fora they mod.

CatFromHue

One of the biggest problems the Travelling Community face is fear.

I'll happily admit I am afraid of Travellers.

The numbers Pavee Point have produced back this up unfortunately

although Travellers only account for 0.6% of the overall population in the Republic of Ireland they account for 22% of the female prison population and 15% of the male prison population (source: Irish Prison Service)

My interactions with the Travelling Community has, unfortunately, been mostly negative.

As the saying goes you can bring a horse to water but you can't make it drink. To me it's up to the Travellers to solve their problems, I can't do anything to help.

Corvo

Some terrible tripe being posted by end of the road again, having to "indulge" the travelling community....what bull****.

osarusan

Wibbs wrote: »

I'd love to see you run a pub for a year and then get back to us, but then again that would be the reality on the ground, as opposed to some nebulous naive ideal in your head that wouldn't survive much contact with actual reality. No doubt at the end of that imaginary year you'd still be looking for the usual culprits in your mind to blame, even though you'd have closed the pub once or twice. You'd pass the buck to your well trodden demons. As per usual for you. At this point you're getting a tad boring with your seeking of offence.

They do "hack it", but there comes a point. Then again I'm engaging with an actual, 24 karat stereotypical "SJW" whose opinions will never change. Well, they might if you ventured beyond your intellectual(and I use the word under major advisement) ivory tower of "leftie" naive nonsense.

What are you on about?

The question was whether or not publicans have a right to refuse admission.

Joey's answer is that it depends on the situation but that they can't legally refuse admission to a traveller just because they are a traveller.

Fairly straightforward answer as far as I can see, so no idea why it caused that rant.